81 F.4th 835
8th Cir.2023Background
- Williams pled guilty to two drug-possession-with-intent-to-distribute counts in a plea agreement that included a broad waiver of "all non-jurisdictional issues" on appeal and a collateral-attack exception for ineffective assistance claims in post-conviction proceedings.
- At change-of-plea Williams acknowledged understanding the agreement and waiver, though he hesitated and said he felt rushed; the court accepted the plea after a Rule 11 colloquy.
- Two months later, defense counsel moved to withdraw because the attorney-client relationship had deteriorated; the district court granted the motion without a hearing and stated Williams would be pro se until new counsel was retained.
- No new counsel was appointed; at sentencing the court treated Williams as self-represented but conducted no Faretta colloquy; Williams orally sought to withdraw his plea and a substantial-assistance departure (U.S.S.G. §5K1.1), which the court denied.
- The court sentenced Williams below the Guidelines range; Williams appealed arguing unconstitutional denial of counsel at sentencing and violation of the right of allocution; the Government moved to dismiss based on the plea-waiver.
- The panel majority held the appeal fell within the waiver, found the waiver knowing and voluntary, rejected a miscarriage-of-justice exception, and dismissed the appeal; Judge Kelly dissented, arguing complete denial of counsel at sentencing is a structural error that should fall within the narrow miscarriage-of-justice exception.
Issues
| Issue | Williams' Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Williams' appellate waiver bars review of his claim that he was denied counsel at sentencing | Waiver does not cover denial-of-counsel at sentencing; even if it did, enforcing it would be a miscarriage of justice | The waiver expressly covers "all non-jurisdictional issues," including sentencing issues; Williams knowingly and voluntarily waived appeal rights | Waiver covers the claim; appeal is barred by the plea-waiver |
| Whether Williams' appellate waiver was knowing and voluntary | Waiver was not fully knowing because he could not have foreseen being deprived of counsel at sentencing | Plea colloquy and written agreement show Williams knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights | Waiver was knowing and voluntary based on the Rule 11 colloquy and plea documents |
| Whether enforcing the waiver would be a "miscarriage of justice" (narrow exception) | A complete denial of counsel at sentencing is a structural error that should trigger the exception | The miscarriage-of-justice exception is narrow and does not apply; permitting sentencing-stage ineffective-assistance claims would swallow waivers | Exception does not apply here; enforcing waiver does not create a miscarriage of justice (majority) |
| Whether the district court violated Faretta / allocution requirements | Court failed to conduct Faretta colloquy and denied allocution; sentencing without counsel violated the Sixth Amendment | These merits errors are within the plea-waiver scope and thus not reviewable on direct appeal | Court found a Faretta violation occurred but did not reach relief because the claim is barred by the valid appellate waiver |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2003) (standards for enforcing plea appeal waivers and miscarriage-of-justice exception)
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) (right to self-representation and requirement of a knowing waiver)
- DeRoo v. United States, 223 F.3d 919 (8th Cir. 2000) (ineffective assistance claims affecting plea-waiver voluntariness may avoid waiver)
- United States v. Djelevic, 161 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 1998) (rejecting use of sentencing-stage ineffective-assistance claims to circumvent a valid appeal waiver)
- Parke v. Raley, 506 U.S. 20 (1992) (defendants may waive important constitutional rights in plea agreements)
- Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999) (distinction between structural errors and trial errors)
- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) (right to counsel as fundamental)
- United States v. Griffin, 668 F.3d 987 (8th Cir. 2012) (appellate-waiver enforcement and direct-appeal limits)
- United States v. Crawford, 487 F.3d 1101 (8th Cir. 2007) (Faretta waiver standards in the Eighth Circuit)